Urban rooms and the expanded ecology of urban living labs

Akbil, E and Butterworth, C (2025) Urban rooms and the expanded ecology of urban living labs. Buildings & Cities, 6(1), pp. 544-560. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

Urban living labs (ULLs) deal with complex urban futures by acting as translators between research and urban co-production processes. The ‘urban room’ (UR) typology is a space for diverse actors and citizens to co-create city futures. This paper examines how the situated, hybrid and participatory methods of the URs compare with those of ULLs. This reveals similarities and differences in building resilience. URs are positioned as place-based infrastructures and active sites of multiplicity, where diverse communities can transform the city, decentring experts in urban transformations. A UR case study of collaborative civic regeneration in Sheffield, UK, is explored through a situated and diffractive analysis. Effective new methods are found to be speculative openness, generative witnessing and inhabiting detachments. These methods are complementary to ULLs and enlist a multiplicity of voices engaged in the co-production of urban knowledge. An expanded ecology of URs and ULLs would enrich ‘dialogical spaces’ within cities towards achieving just adaptation and resilience. POLICY RELEVANCE Engaging diverse communities in entangled challenges of city and planetary futures is crucial, yet significant gaps exist, especially concerning minority populations in the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11 datasets. ‘UR’ can nurture diverse partnerships and resilient forms of urban co-production by reaching new communities in sites of concern. This approach expands the ULL methods by addressing the critical planning challenge of inclusive community engagement for equitable urban development. URs provide new tactics that engage diverse actors and give voice to marginalised people. This long-term, situated and additive practice can transform the diversity of engagement, foster a plurality of urban futures and create novel forms of hybrid governance.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: co-production; dialogical spaces; equity; future visioning; resilience; transformative adaptation; urban governance; urban living labs; urban planning; urban rooms
Index terms: urban development, sustainable development goal, minority, ecology, adaptation, United Nations, transformation, community engagement, partnership, case study, urban governance, governance, urban planning, dataset, co-production, population
Subjects: innovation studies, user focus, environmental science, urban planning, urban design, sustainable design, demography, community and social dimensions, business, data collection methods, institutional frameworks, sociology, partnership management, data management
Topics: Sustainability, Ethics, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Design Practice
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here